The China Post reports:
Countries opposed to an EU law forcing the world’s airlines to pay for greenhouse gas emissions agreed on a basket of retaliatory measures, adding to a series of threats that have raised the prospect of the globe’s first carbon trade war.
Not possible I hear you say. The world noted Australia’s legislated imposition of an ETS via a carbon tax and are now moving full steam ahead implement their own. It must be. China, the US, India, Japan and others were just waiting for Australia to legislate for an ETS. They can not possibly be opposed to the EU ETS covering international air travel. But they are. They are all members of the Coalition of the unwilling, which included:
Representatives of Armenia, Argentina, Republic of Belarus, Brazil, Cameroon, Chile, China, Cuba, Guatemala, India, Japan, Republic of Korea, Mexico, Nigeria, Paraguay, Russian Federation, Saudi Arabia, Seychelles, Singapore, South Africa, Thailand, Uganda and United States of America, gathered in Moscow, on the 21st and 22nd February 2012,.
Of course, despite domestic distractions the Australian government will be protecting our interests. Australians travel further than almost anyone else when going to Europe, so the impost will be particularly hard on them. But somehow we seem to have missed the Moscow meeting. This despite it involving our biggest trading partners. Surely the government could not be embarrassed at such a rapid world-wide refutation of its impose a carbon tax rhetoric?
China has instructed its airlines not to pay the fee. Russia is considering doing likewise:
“The Russian government is now reviewing a bill prohibiting Russian airlines to participate in emission trading: It means considering a retaliatory approach,” Aeroflot said on the eve of the talks…
Aeroflot said the law could cost it 800 million euros ($1.05 billion) by 2025. It warned that the opposition could change its approach from “oral protestations” to “various forms of trade wars with the EU.”
Will the Australian government do likewise? Of course not, what does it care about our hip pockets. It’s already demonstrated a callous disregard with it imposition of a carbon tax as an intermediary step to an ETS. Don’t ask me why we have to go through a carbon dioxide tax to get to a carbon dioxide emission trading scheme. I did not vote for one. Almost no one in Australia did. Our major parties promised not to introduce one during the election campaign.
But once in office… promises? Only the little people have to keep those. What’s our word worth compared to imposing our will, to transforming society? To creating a world without exploitation of
man the environment? The creation of a new era, one in which our land will last a thousand years, rather than being largely submerged in a couple of hundred. Mao would have loved the rhetoric. Speaking of Mao, check out this suit?
Our politicians acted so our children will again know rain not perpetual drought. So English children will be able to see snow. Sigh, those were the days, before floods in Australia and snow drifts in England demonstrated the hollowness of the climate alarmists claims. But why let facts get in the way of rhetoric and enriching vested interests? Marxist ending of exploitation of man by man does not move the masses anymore. But ending exploitation of the environment still garnishes votes and subsidies to a privileged few.
In the real world a global coalition of the unwilling has formed to fight the imposition of a carbon tax on international air travel. The coalition unites the economic, political, military and population heavyweights of the US, Russia, China, India, Japan and dozens of other countries. Come on Canada. Come on Australia. You can do it. You too can stand up to the Europeans. They are so broke they would be mad to risk a trade war. But they must have been mad to have got themselves into their present state.
Unlikely as it may seem, I guess we have to add a carbon tax induced trade war to our list of global black or grey swans. After all, even the BBC recognizes the possibility. As if we needed another.